The current study showed that it is feasible to provide controlled hypotension with the IV administration of dexmedetomidine as an adjunct to other anesthetics. It also showed a lower incidence of bradycardia with lower loading doses. Furthermore, while the hypotensive effect of dexmedetomidine was preserved with all three loading doses, a loading dose of 0.9, but not 0.8 µg/kg, had similar effects of 1.0 µg/kg on the surgical field quality in terms of bleeding and visibility.
Following the recent studies demonstrating the association of MAPs equal to or less than 60 - 65 mmHg with increased risk of postoperative acute kidney injury, cardiac events, and mortality (
2-
4,
6,
7), the allowable blood pressure decrease during anesthesia has changed over the years. Sun et al. (
3), in a study on patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery showed that the AKI that occurred in 6.3% of patients was associated with MAP less than 60 mmHg for 11 to 20 min and MAP less than 55 mmHg for more than 10 min in a graded fashion. Walsh et al. (
2) demonstrated that the risk of AKI and myocardial injury was increased at MAPs less than 55 - 60 mmHg. Therefore, generally, a MAP over 60 mmHg -70 mmHg is recommended (
5). In most of the studies evaluating the consequences of hypotension, it was not specified whether the episodes of hypotension were induced deliberately or occurred incidentally. Moreover, in some of the studies, above half of the patients had an age of over 60 years, or an ASA-PS equal to three or more, which made them more susceptible to hypotension adverse effects (
2-
4,
6). Given the eligibility of having a lower age range and limited comorbidities (i.e., ASA-PS limited to class I and II) to participate in our study, we planned to provide a MAP of 60 mmHg - 70 mmHg as a modified definition of controlled hypotension.
Durmus et al. (
22) and Ayoglu et al. (
23) in different studies have shown that dexmedetomidine reduced bleeding during septoplasty. They administered a loading dose of 1 µg/kg over 10 minutes followed by dexmedetomidine infusion. In their studies, the Map was decreased following the administration of dexmedetomidine and was lower compared to the control group during operation. In the study by Janatmakan et al. (
46), with a lower loading dose of dexmedetomidine, 0.5 µg/kg, it has been shown that intraoperative bleeding was less than the control group in spine surgery. The result of our study is consistent with their studies as the MAP reduced after intervention and during operation. The MAPs were similar in our study groups, but the bleeding score was higher in group 0.8 compared to group 1.0.
Bleeding during operation is not necessarily reduced by a decrease in blood pressure alone; however, other contributing factors, such as HR may be involved. Sieśkiewicz et al. (
47) demonstrated that to achieve good operative field conditions, in a great proportion of patients, maintaining the HR in a stable low value (i.e., around 60 beats/min) can preclude the need to reduce MAPs to a dangerously low level. In our study, and as shown by Durmus et al. (
22) and Ayoglu et al. (
23), the administration of a dose of 1 µg/kg followed by the drug’s infusion during surgery resulted in a decrease in blood pressure as well as HR. Other studies showed that dexmedetomidine was as effective as remifentanil infusion in providing controlled hypotension and reduced bleeding (
9,
11,
12). Karabayirli et al. (
12) demonstrated that the IV dexmedetomidine administration (1 µg/kg) infused over 10 minutes followed by the infusion of 0.7 µg/kg/h has similar effects of a bolus of IV remifentanil (1 µg/kg) followed by 0.25 - 0.5 µg/kg, on the amount of bleeding, surgical field condition, and hemodynamics. In these studies, both HRs and MAPs decreased during operation. Therefore, similar effects of remifentanil and dexmedetomidine might be attributed to their similar effects on reducing MAP and HR. Rokhtabnak et al. (
17) reported that compared to magnesium sulfate, dexmedetomidine was more effective in reducing bleeding during rhinoplasty; however, similar MAPs were provided during operation. In their study, the HRs were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group. Thus, it seems that the decrease in HR has an impact on the decrease in bleeding during the operation. In the current study, the difference in HR between the groups was not statistically significant, but the incidence of bradycardia was higher in the groups with higher loading doses. The time interval between data recordings might not be short enough to detect more exact values to compare.
The bradycardia associated with IV administration of dexmedetomidine was explained in two phases; the first phase is thought to be vagally mediated reflex bradycardia in response to initial induced hypertension, especially seen in young, healthy patients (
48) with high vagal tone (
49), and the second phase occurs following the centrally mediated inhibition of sympathetic outflow. (
31,
33) There are some reports of cardiac arrests following IV infusion of dexmedetomidine, most of which resolved after a few resuscitative efforts (
38-
43). However, not all the cases could be attributed to dexmedetomidine alone, as other contributing factors were involved, and most of the reported cases had significant morbidities and/or with some sorts of atrioventricular conduction diseases, though there were reported cases of sinus arrest in young, healthy patients, as well (
49).
Adverse events associated with dexmedetomidine occur most frequently during or shortly after a loading infusion (
33). Various methods, albeit with controversial results, have been evaluated to moderate hypotension and bradycardia associated with dexmedetomidine administration, either by omitting (
50,
51), decreasing (
52), or slowing (
53) the loading infusion. Ickeringill et al. (
50) demonstrated that the undesirable hemodynamic effects of administration of dexmedetomidine infusion were prevented by the elimination of the loading dose, without compromising sedation and analgesia, in patients after major operations. Ibrahim et al. (
51) showed that although the infusion of dexmedetomidine without a loading dose decreased the HR and BP, at the recorded time intervals during craniotomy, no significant bradycardia as well as less analgesic and hypnotic requirements, were observed compared to the control group in their study. Sim et al. (
52) showed a similar decrease in HR and BP in patients who received either 0.5 or 1 µg/kg dexmedetomidine loading dose during sedation. Kung et al. (
53) reported a lower incidence of hypotension and bradycardia with a slower infusion of the loading dose of dexmedetomidine, 20 minutes versus 10 minutes, in elderly patients undergoing spinal anesthesia. The results of our study were consistent with those of Ickeringill et al. (
50), Ibrahim et al. (
51), and Kung et al. (
53), as the decrease in dexmedetomidine loading dose affected the incidence of bradycardia. It is noteworthy that in such studies, the primary outcome was sedation, whereas, in our study, the primary outcome was the provision of controlled hypotension, which results from the cardiovascular effects of dexmedetomidine. Therefore, the elimination of the hypotensive effect of the drug was not our goal as such effects should only be controlled in an acceptable range (i.e., MAP above 60 mmHg); the only concern was to prevent severe bradycardia.
Given that the risk for severe bradycardia, leading to pulseless electrical activity, increases when patients develop a greater than 30% decrease in HR following dexmedetomidine administration (
38) we divided the cases of bradycardia into two groups, those with a lesser decrease in HR (i.e., more than 20% and up to 30% decrease in HR), and those with a greater decrease in HR (i.e., more than 30% in HR). In total, 40 patients (49.4% of all) experienced an episode of bradycardia in this study; the incidence was highest in group 1.0 and lowest in group 0.8 (
Table 4). However, the incidence of bradycardia cannot be entirely attributed to dexmedetomidine, as many anesthetics, such as propofol and sevoflurane with negative chronotropic effects were administered concomitantly; but as the groups were similar in terms of anesthetic regimen, the difference in the incidence of bradycardia between the groups could be due to the difference in the loading dose of dexmedetomidine. Interestingly, the incidence of bradycardia with a lesser reduction in HR (20% - 30%) was similar between the study groups; the significant difference between the groups was in the incidence of bradycardia with a greater decrease in HR (> 30%), with the higher incidence in the higher loading dose. Therefore, based on the results, reducing the loading dose was associated with a lower incidence of more severe bradycardia.
To our knowledge, no study is available comparing similar loading doses of dexmedetomidine in this regard, which could be a strong point of this study; however, using a larger sample size may lead to more accurate and clear results. We recommend clinical trials with different dexmedetomidine loading doses in different anesthetic settings, and with larger sample sizes. Administering an alternate anesthesia induction agent, not having a considerable effect on HR, may provide more valuable and definite results about the bradycardia effect of dexmedetomidine.
5.1. Conclusions
We conclude that using IV dexmedetomidine as an adjunct to other anesthetics is an acceptable approach to provide controlled hypotension. Administration of a loading dose of 0.9 µg/kg, but not 0.8 µg/kg, compared to 1.0 µg/kg, provides similar surgical field conditions in terms of bleeding and visibility. Furthermore, despite the decrease in heart rate, the hypotensive effect of the drug is preserved.